GeForce RTX 4070 vs GTX 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 and GeForce RTX 4070, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 260
2008, $449
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
2.88
RTX 4070
2023, $599
12 GB GDDR6X, 200 Watt
64.46
+2138%

RTX 4070 outperforms GTX 260 by a whopping 2138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking84333
Place by popularitynot in top-10061
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1461.87
Power efficiency1.2324.98
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGT200AD104
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (18 years ago)12 April 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RTX 4070 has 44093% better value for money than GTX 260.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1925888
Core clock speed576 MHz1920 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2475 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt200 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.86455.4
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS29.15 TFLOPS
ROPs2864
TMUs64184
Tensor Coresno data184
Ray Tracing Coresno data46
L1 Cacheno data5.8 MB
L2 Cache224 KB36 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mm240 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 16-pin
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount896 MB12 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz1313 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s504.2 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTV1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.9
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GTX 260 2.88
RTX 4070 64.46
+2138%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 260 1198
Samples: 3081
RTX 4070 26855
+2142%
Samples: 20788

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD8−9
−96%
198
1440p4−5
−96.2%
104
4K2−363
+3050%

Cost per frame, $

1080p56.133.03
+94.6%
1440p112.255.76
+94.9%
4K224.509.51
+95.8%
  • RTX 4070 has 95% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 4070 has 95% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 4070 has 96% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 320 320
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 216 216
Resident Evil 4 Remake 240 240

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 250 250
Battlefield 5 170−180 170−180
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 174 174
Far Cry 5 249 249
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 250−260 250−260
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 148 148
Battlefield 5 170−180 170−180
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 143 143
Far Cry 5 234 234
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 250−260 250−260
Grand Theft Auto V 174 174
Metro Exodus 170 170
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 351 351
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 170−180 170−180
Cyberpunk 2077 128 128
Far Cry 5 218 218
Forza Horizon 4 250−260 250−260
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 171 171
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350 300−350

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 190−200 190−200
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550 500−550
Grand Theft Auto V 137 137
Metro Exodus 104 104
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 450−500 450−500

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 160−170 160−170
Cyberpunk 2077 81 81
Far Cry 5 173 173
Forza Horizon 4 220−230 220−230
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140 140

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 60−65 60−65
Counter-Strike 2 85−90 85−90
Grand Theft Auto V 146 146
Metro Exodus 65 65
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 117 117
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 85−90 85−90
Cyberpunk 2077 36 36
Far Cry 5 93 93
Forza Horizon 4 170−180 170−180
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how GTX 260 and RTX 4070 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4070 is 2375% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4070 is 2500% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4070 is 3050% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.88 64.46
Recency 16 June 2008 12 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 12 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 200 Watt

GTX 260 has 9% lower power consumption.

RTX 4070, on the other hand, has a 2138% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1271% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 92% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 710 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 12872 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 260 or GeForce RTX 4070, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.